User talk:Ahunt

International Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue Manual

Can you enlighten me a bit as to the notability issues with respect to translated articles? Right now, every single article I've translated has been flagged like this. It makes me not want to bother translating other articles.

This article already existed on two other language versions of Wikipedia, and neither article has the notability notice.

Yes, it's slim right now, but it's only a couple hours old.PetesGuide (talk) (K6WEB) 00:30, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

I didn't tag it for being slim, but for lack of notability and having only one primary source, the book itself. I can't speak for policies on other language versions of Wikipedia and, yes, policies are different in each language Wikipedia, but here on en.wikipedia the policy is really clear, each topic for an article must have third party references to show that the topic is notable enough to qualify for an article. If we didn't require third party references for books for instance, then every book ever written, whether published or unpublished, would have an article about it, using the book itself as a reference. - Ahunt (talk) 01:35, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Environmentalism in Islam

Actually I want to add 10 Green Hidiths (sayings) of Muhammad PBUH - Last messenger of Allah (God) . Islam has Billion followers around the world. So these instructions can be published to suitable wiki pedia pages. This will help environmentalism around the world. Can any one help me ? I am a new user. Link is here http://aboutislam.net/shariah/hadith/hadith-collections/10-green-hadiths/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Envoirnment Lover (talk • contribs) 15:23, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, but this subject is far from my area of expertise. - Ahunt (talk) 15:46, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello!

Thank you for your welcome message on my talk page! It's cool that you have flown all those different planes and work with open-source software so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rose64bit (talk • contribs) 17:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

I am glad that was all helpful! - Ahunt (talk) 18:05, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Viking Air Logo 2014.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Viking Air Logo 2014.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:31, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks!

Just a quick thank you for the welcome message. I'm learning how to edit and will definitely take a look at list of help pages/articles you provided in your message. Thanks again! - Nurbout12 (talk) 05:21, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your note, I am glad that was helpful! If you get stuck feel free to drop me a note. - Ahunt (talk) 13:18, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Uncivil behaviour

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. I have requested discussion of your uncivil behaviour incident on the Su-25 Talk page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santamoly (talk • contribs)

ANI item closed: User:Santamoly was blocked for two weeks. - Ahunt (talk) 18:45, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Aircraft noise

Noted your reaction to bullet-points in the lede. I know it's a less-usual format, but there are cases where it is the best way of separating-out the elements of a complex subject and providing a scannable overview. I don't think solid prose would have held the attention. Valetude (talk) 18:42, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

I did look at it and I generally agree with what you said here, which is why I just formatted and made the edit summary note. Others may disagree, though. - Ahunt (talk) 18:45, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Verifiability

Hello Ahunt, thanks for all your cooperation! I try to avoid having multiple whole refs in aircraft specs because it hampers its WP:Verifiability. For example, in Dassault_Falcon_5X#Specifications, there was 1 ref for the whole section (Flight, 2013) and when I found a source for its empty weight I added it with a direct inline citation (BCA, 2015). If you group together both on top, it makes it difficult for a reader to verify a statement, eg: from where comes the span? (Flight only) from where comes the empty weight? (BCA only) Faster Verification renders Wikipedia more credible. Thanks!--Marc Lacoste (talk) 07:19, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

The main thing is that in the past we have tried to avoid scattering footnotes in the specs and collected them in the refs at the top, even if they provide only one spec number. It doesn't diminish verifiability but does make the specs neater and easier to read. It isn't a big issue with just one footnote, but some articles have ended with many all over the numbers and it creates a bit of a mess. - Ahunt (talk) 14:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

The Template:Aircraft specs documentation gives no guidance. I am thinking this is worth a discussion at WikiProject Aircraft, so I have started that at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Aircraft#Footnotes_in_Template:Aircraft_specs. - Ahunt (talk) 15:55, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

A-26 production numbers

Hi, thanks for your recent revert to Douglas A-26 Invader. As with most aircraft in production at end of WW2, many A-26s were built but not accepted by USAAF, so counting aircraft is a minefield. Thompson book p. 45 gives a breakdown of 2452 aircraft built at Long Beach and Tulsa that were accepted, but exact serial ranges not clear. Further airframes are reported to have been completed, flown and sold privately or to French AF, perhaps the 51 difference from the 2503 quoted by Boeing (ugh) at [1], and others. Regret very busy archiving, little time to check/research/correct this subject.PeterWD (talk) 08:10, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your note here. That last edit at Douglas A-26 Invader was made by User:71.223.69.35 and cited no actual ref that made sense. Was that your edit? - Ahunt (talk) 12:43, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, but IP user not me. He intended to write [2] as the ref, but used round brackets. My point is that it would need a lot of analysis to confirm the exact number, one way or the other.PeterWD (talk) 14:34, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the clarification on that. Do you think that number he put in is worth reverting to, then? If so I can format it all correctly. - Ahunt (talk) 14:50, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

New editor for Pipistrel

Hello, I'm Taja. I "inherited" this account Ymmo and I saw your contribution to it regarding editing a Pipistrel Virus page. This is just my start on Wikipedia as an editor so you'll forgive me if I don't know what all this is about and what precisely I have to do. I am employed at Pipistrel as the PR and I would like to make some changes regarding the aircraft, the history of the company and the CV of the General Manager. How can I make sure that you don't delete changes that I make? Thank you. - Ymmo (talk) 8:35, 13 March 2018 (CET)

Thanks for your note. Oh boy, where to start. First off you can't share accounts. This is explained at Wikipedia:Username policy. You need to start a new individual (not company) account as explained at WP:ISU. Then, once you have done that, you need to make a clear declaration that you work for the company on your user page to avoid being blocked, as per WP:COI. Then, also as noted there, you need to not edit any pages about the company or its products or competitors, but instead use the talk pages to suggest changes. Editors who are not in a conflict of interest will assess your requests and see what needs changing in the articles. It is important to remember that the place to promote the company and its products is on the company website, not on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an independent publication. We aren't here to do what the company wants. We are to provide neutral and balanced information and that may include criticism of the company, when there are sources that criticize it. Probably the most helpful thing you can do is ensure that any news from the company is on the company website (as in press releases) and then point them out on the article talk pages, so neutral editors can use them as cited sources, when appropriate. - Ahunt (talk) 12:08, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for your detailed answer. Wowch, this really is a headache. I will read all the pages you gave me links to, thank you. Apart from reading a ton of sub-pages, is there anyone who I can contact directly to ask questions? I don't want to waste any more of your time, you were very kind to me already :) Thanks! - Ymmo (talk) 13:19, 14 March 2018 (CET)

It is great to hear from you. The short version is: post suggested changes on the talk page for the article and if you have any questions you can ask me here or on the article talk page. That is why I am here; we are all building the encyclopedia together! - Ahunt (talk) 12:39, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello! After studying this stuff almost as much as my PhD, I tried to do two changes on the Pipistrel's page, under the "History" chapter. If you have some spare time, you can have a look to tell me if I did it correctly or wrote some big stupidity :) Thanks for your time! - Ymmo (talk) 10:50, 27 March 2018 (CET)

No problem, I checked it over and made some adjustments, mostly just for English comprehension and linking. - Ahunt (talk) 13:14, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

We'll see how long it lasts before some do-gooder removes it! - BilCat (talk) 21:26, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Badge of honour? - Ahunt (talk) 21:28, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Not really, just making fun of a particularly stupid vandal/hoaxer. - BilCat (talk) 22:38, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Always worthwhile. Of course the irony is that he is blocked. - Ahunt (talk) 23:00, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, both the master and puppet, thankfully. - BilCat (talk) 01:24, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Nice to see the system working like that. - Ahunt (talk) 11:35, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Lancair Legacy

Hi, Ahunt.

I noticed that the Lancair Legacy Design and development section describes an EAA AirVenture award win in 2014 but not the 2016 win. May I add it, or would you mind adding it?

Thanks for your help!

Thargenediad (talk) 18:10, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Sure go ahead! - Ahunt (talk) 18:50, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

HoggardHigh

Thanks for helping with this sock farm. In some cases, he's making successive edits from two different IPs, apparently on purpose, so be sure that you're reverting to the correct version. I've had to revert twice a couple of times already. If he uses the same IP to revert reverts, that's when I post to the SPI page for a block, or if he's using a registered name. - BilCat (talk) 23:27, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Standard tricks. Someone needs a new hobby, I think, or at least a girlfriend. - Ahunt (talk) 23:29, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Yup. - BilCat (talk) 04:37, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

King Air 250C

G'day, have you seen any Canadian industry press about the first-ever - and so far only - Beechcraft B200CGT (250C) built, registration C-GLUF, being delivered to Can-West last year? I will keep an eye out here for your reply. Cheers YSSYguy (talk) 07:03, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

An interesting question! All I could find was its registration info. There doesn't seem to be even a fleet list on the company website. There is an official parts catalog and owners manual, though. - Ahunt (talk) 13:51, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I have access to all the Textron Aviation tech pubs. I was hoping for something more than just being able to prove that the aircraft exists; Textron doesn't even appear to be marketing it in any way. Thanks for the effort, cheers. YSSYguy (talk) 22:49, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I came to the same conclusion, it isn't being marketed much. It seems to be a pretty minor variant. Do you know what the difference is? - Ahunt (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Cargo door and I think increased MTOW as well. YSSYguy (talk) 23:02, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Well that makes sense. You would think Textron would at least let people know! - Ahunt (talk) 23:04, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:TL Ultralight Logo 2014.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TL Ultralight Logo 2014.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:55, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

The logo was removed by a vandal, has been reverted. - Ahunt (talk) 13:43, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Corvair

Hey there, referring to this edit, could you add the citations? That's required per WP:V, specifically WP:CIRC. Thank you! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 15:27, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Some of the aircraft engine articles have hundreds of applications, so we have a WikiProject Aircraft consensus that we don't normally add all the footnotes, just to avoid a lot of unnecessary clutter, since they are all referenced in the linked articles, but if you want them I'll add them. - Ahunt (talk) 21:25, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Select Survey Invite

I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take no more than 1-2 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.

Your survey Link: http://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9S3JByWf57fXEkR?Q_DL=56np5HpEZWkMlr7_9S3JByWf57fXEkR_MLRP_cO7GnjaivDRiAD3&Q_CHL=gl

I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.

Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 01:08, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Y - Ahunt (talk) 01:31, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Talk page, Saratov Airlines Flight 703

Just a short note to say "thank you," for your comments on the talk page of "Saratov Airlines Flight 703."

Another editor finally removed that erroneous and contradictory statement in the lead, which tried to present 2017 as an airline fatality-free year, which it wasn't.

IMHO, your concise and logical statements helped to inspire him to remove that confusing commentary, thereby improving the article. EditorASC (talk) 00:05, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

I am glad that was helpful. - Ahunt (talk) 00:19, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

DDG blocking in Russia

How can I prove it if no one computer from Russia can't reach DDG servers and no any article about it. This is related to https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/17/17246150/telegram-russia-ban — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.252.69.125 (talk) 00:00, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

The Twitter post says service is temporarily unavailable and DDG is working on it. No indication that it is blocked. See WP:OR. - Ahunt (talk) 00:06, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

haha you can't believe in that but check the ping from Russia to DDG — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.252.69.125 (talk) 01:18, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

We still need a ref to cite. You can't cite a TCP ping. DDG says "We are experiencing some connectivity issues in Russia right now. We apologize for the inconvenience and are actively trying to resolve the issue, which we think is related to this:" and cites the Russian Telegram mess. This doesn't indicate any intent to block DDG, just technical incompetence. That article indicates that the attempt to limit telegram in Russia has affected many on-line services, like banking services, not just DDG. At this point, if the interruption only lasts a few days I don't think it is worth mentioning. We doesn't list every outage in every country. If it goes on for a while it can be added. - Ahunt (talk) 10:57, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank for thanking for me for my edit on HAL Tejas. Whenever I find that somebody has thanked me for my tireless contributions over the last few weeks, that makes me feel happy. Rock on. UnsungKing123 (talk) 21:17, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

I am glad that was helpful. We are all mostly editing alone at home and I find just a little bit of encouragement can be really helpful to keep editors feeling like someone is checking their contributions and feels that they are making the encyclopedia better! - Ahunt (talk) 21:21, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

SkyReach BushCat

Hi there, I don’t do a lot of editing on wiki so not sure of the protocols. I recently talked with Michael, the CEO of SkyReach and he tells me there is no Jabiru engine option. I was asked my because engines are made up n I be same state I live in and so would have been nice to ‘buy local’. This is why I removed Jabiru from the range available.

Danny Danny galaga (talk) 01:52, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Stupid smart phone! ‘Asked my’ is ‘asking’ and ‘up n l be’ should be ‘in the’ ! Anyway you get the idea :) Danny galaga (talk) 03:04, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

There are two cited refs that show the Jabiru 2200 at least was available at one time, even if it isn't now. The first is the FAA LSA approval list. This is based on the engines that the manufacturer submitted to the FAA. It shows that the BushCat equipped with the 2200 was flight tested and is approved for the aircraft. The second is the SkyReach's own "Choices and Options" document which shows that they have tested the aircraft with the 2200 and offer props for it even today. The wording in the article is very careful to say, "The standard engines used are the 80 hp (60 kW) Rotax 912UL and the 100 hp (75 kW) Rotax 912ULS powerplants, although the 85 hp (63 kW) Jabiru 2200 and 60 hp (45 kW) Rotax 582 are also approved and have been used" and "The design is a US Federal Aviation Administration accepted light-sport aircraft with the Rotax 912UL, Rotax 912ULS, Rotax 582 and Jabiru 2200 engines fitted", based on these two refs, both of which come from the company itself. None of that says that the company is selling the aircraft with the 2200 today, but that it is perfectly fine to install the engine and it has been tested as such. - Ahunt (talk) 12:03, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Rutan Quickie

Hi, I wonder if you have a decent image of the Rutan Quickie? Arrivisto (talk) 15:10, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

The one on that article page is the best one I have of the single-seater version, although I have several of the two-seater Q2. The single seaters are a bit of a museum piece! - Ahunt (talk) 15:26, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Regarding my edit on Sydney Seaplanes

Thanks for informing me regarding the use of the (all) tag - although I am curious, is it new procedure that where there are 0 survivors, (all) is not listed next to the fatality number? I see the tag is still present in this article. Thanks in advance. ◄Sandshark23► talk♦contribs 15:54, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

It is redundant, so we have a consensus not to do that.  Fixed - Ahunt (talk) 16:02, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

About Skidding and Slipping (and my edit on Coordinated flight)

I have other references (FAA's AFH, for instance) who confirm that skidding is when the aircraft is too much to the inside of the turn and slipping is when the aircraft is pointing to the outside of the turn.

I'm a bit confused as of how to check that reference that says otherwise. Can you guide me on how to obtain it so I could check?

Fernandohbc (talk) 15:40, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

The AFH is quite correct, a slip is to the inside of a turn and a skid is to the outside of a turn. You had it backwards in your edit. - Ahunt (talk) 15:47, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

The AFH has that a slip is to the outside of a turn and a skid is to the inside of a turn. I really think it is backwards in the current version, actually. Can you point me to the specific page in the AFH where it says otherwise? Fernandohbc (talk) 18:45, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

The AFH is not really well written. It says "A skid is when the pilot may feel that they are being pressed toward the outside of the turn and toward the inside of the turn during a slip." That is correct, but not clear. This is probably clearer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAzoEEc36Ms The cited ref from the article, also says " Too much rudder and too little aileron produces a skid. Too little rudder and too much aileron produces a slip. Sometimes a slip is desirable, but a skid really never is...turning the rudder alone to make a turn in an airplane always produces a skid." - Ahunt (talk) 19:07, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

All you said makes total sense to me and looks correct, but these statements don't support the conclusion that the page has. From the cited ref from the article, as you noted, "Too much rudder and too little aileron produces a skid". In this situation, the aircraft is going to be pointed to the inside of the turn. Conversely, on a slip, the aircraft is going to be pointed to the outside. This is the opposite of what the page says, and I encourage a review to make sure it is consistent. That's why I'm curious to see the reference [3] in the page (do you know where to find it?). Finally, maybe what needs to be clarified in the page is what the "outside" and "inside" refers to, but the page definitely has it backwards now, and I encourage you to reassess my edit. Thanks! 2620:0:1000:5E10:71CE:BF45:1EC4:4D6D (talk) 20:10, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

And sorry, I wasn't logged in when I made the last comment ;-) Fernandohbc (talk) 20:13, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

The refs are all consistent with what the article says currently. Skidding is when you have too little bank or too much rudder and the aircraft will "skid" out of the turn, just like a car skidding in a tun would do. Too much bank or too little rudder and the plane will "slip" inside the turn. - Ahunt (talk) 20:54, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Very poorly written aircraft article

Hi Ahunt, take a look at this article on Mahindra Aerospace. This needs to be improved immediately. I notified you cause it is gonna take an entire taskforce to immediately bring the article to standards. I am busy building Wikiproj Aviation on Hi.wiki so I don't have time to fix it. --Navinsingh133 (talk) 18:20, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. Yup it is terrible. I have nominated it for speedy deletion as spam. - Ahunt (talk) 01:00, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Found out how it survived so long, actually this was a better article once, but an IP address 103.81.88.252 messed it up trying to make it better. Looks like he is an Mahindra Employee, as with most Indian students, he is taught factory style education which means he is good with answering questions but bad in understanding English(or anything else). I believe he was trying to help but couldn't understand anything about Wikipedia. Anyway, we better get this under our watchlist now. Thanks for the quick action.--Navinsingh133 (talk) 09:18, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Well the CSD was removed, but it has been completely re-written as a result. Now it just needs all the duplications from the subsidiaries removed, so I'll have a look at that. - Ahunt (talk) 13:39, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

 Done - Ahunt (talk) 15:17, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Electric engine specs

Re: the new Emrax electric engine articles: Do we need to create an {{electricspecs}} electric engine specs template to go along with {{Pistonspecs}} and {{Jetspecs}}? There may not be many right now, but they will probably proliferate some time in the near future, and we need to be ready. We might also want a hybrid propulsion template, either a separate one, or built into the electric one. Thoughts? - BilCat (talk) 19:30, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

I have been thinking about just that issue, myself. We have a few electric aircraft engine articles and I have been toying with the specs to see what might be included in a template. The possible parameters are quite new to me. - Ahunt (talk) 19:34, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

It's quite new to me too! There are probably some existing electic engine infoboxes somewhere on Wikipedia that we could copy parameters from. I'll see what I can find. - BilCat (talk) 19:41, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

• All I could find that deals with any sort of electric engine were {{Infobox locomotive}} and {{Infobox German railway vehicle}}. There's not much in either one, but they might give you some ideas. We should probably post something at WP:AIR at some point, as some of the regulars may have more experience with electric motors. - BilCat (talk) 19:55, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Well I have a list that I am compiling from my ref in use. It looks like this so far:

General characteristics

• Engine type: Brushless or Brushed electric aircraft engine
• Length:
• Width:
• Height:
• Weight:
• Coil type: Outrunner disk collector
• Reduction drive: none/poly V-belt
• Cooling: air/liquid

Performance

• Voltage: V nominal
• Best efficiency:  %
• Current drain, maximum: A
• Current drain, cruise: A
• Power: kW at rpm
• Power to weight: kW/kg

- Ahunt (talk) 19:54, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Further comments

Perhaps it would be best to create the template with the parameters I have and then let everyone else have a kick at it? - Ahunt (talk) 20:00, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. If I did it, I'd just copy the code from Jetspecs or Pistonspecs, and convert them to what you have so far. Do you want me to do that, or would you rather give it a shot yourself? It would probably take me a couple of days to get to it. - BilCat (talk) 20:31, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Already done! Template:Electricspecs, now I just have to test fly it and write the documentation! - Ahunt (talk) 20:33, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Okay, documentation is done and the first test case at Geiger HDP 13.5 seems to work! I'll have to announce it at WP:AIR. - Ahunt (talk) 20:59, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Jump in at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Aircraft#New_spec_template_for_electric_aircraft_engines. - Ahunt (talk) 21:30, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Snowbirds

Ahunt, could you keep an eye on this article? A relatively new editor keeps adding long lists of non-notable squadron pilots, crew, and other personnel in violation of WP:LISTPEOPLE. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 22:13, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Will do. - Ahunt (talk) 22:16, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 22:26, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I've just inserted some info regarding PR-WBV crash on Brazil, which implied a hull loss. But I've saw you just reverted it. Can you say why? Thanks in advance.